Misogyny is defined as either the hatred of women OR the lack of trust of women. Feminists tend to view it as the former only when they attempt to shame rational men, but it more commonly is simple lack of trust.

I am a misogynist and without apology. However, I am very fond of certain women that I choose to have in my life. What gives?

We first must understand that at a very basic level, women are programmed by nature and social conditioning to dispossess men of resources in whatever way they can.

-Some women use wiles and attraction to prompt men to willingly use or give resources to women (ie marriage).

-Some women engage in "damseling" to ignite the rescuer impulse in men (I lost my cellphone on my date with you! Oh, honey let me buy you a brand new one!).

-Some women shame men into buying them drinks as a gauge for future resource grabs.

-Some women befriend men at work so the willingly men take on the women's work for a fake hint of sexual favors later.

-Some women strategically pull legal levers against men in the form of fake or frivolous lawsuits to strong-arm monetary settlements or judgments from men (EEO complaints and divorce).

-Some women nag, stress-out, hen-peck their men into an early grave, or they procure the killings of their husbands for insurance money and resource grabs.

-Some women bat their eyelashes and repeat how much they like something to trigger the, "Let me get that for your dear" impulse in men.

You get the point......

Women, with the aid of the state and other men, want what you have to offer. And some will use passive means to get it and others more active means. This is their primal charge in life.

With this in mind, misogyny (in the context of lack of trust) is morally justified even in the face of feminist screams of, "You're a misogynist pig who hates women!" which is nothing but an attempt to put you on the defensive and prove otherwise to gain female approval/potential sexual access.

This is not to deny the existence of exceptional women who have the intellect and grit to override this female imperative, but as we know exceptions cannot disprove what is generally true.

The man who generally "trusts" women, is either a fool or a future man-slave in the making.

If you are not a misogynist (in the lack of trust sense), you had better be one soon before you are eventually duped like most men.

Read more about this in Esther Vilar's groundbreaking book, "The Manipulated Man." It will change your life.

I haven't experienced the thing about being plundered big time for resources like that at all, I mean apart from p4p fun or paying for a meal or movie ticket. Other than that I make it clear right away that I'm no santa claus. I think "providing" a little bit is ok and natural for the man, as long as you get the same value back.

But I see more of an issue the fact that 2/3 of women are just such goddamn losers, it's unbelievable the trash that has to be sifted through sometimes.
Some women even despite having the huge advantage of having a p* and *ss, still screw it up and can't find/keep a man, due to their Borderline crap.
So instead of distrust, sometimes i just feel disappointment and think it's just not worth the hassle.

It's probably worse than 2/3 since, like I've posted before, women "8" or above start being useless/nutters quick in the curve nowadays. It used to be that regular men could find a hottie that would make a good mate or housewife and do something beyond selfies, but that's dying out fast.

So is "misogyny" "justified"? Well, you hinted at this in one of the race threads, still need to make an effort and give each individual a chance...
there are some gems to be found within the cow dung.

1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?

Contrarian Expatriate wrote:Misogyny is defined as either the hatred of women OR the lack of trust of women. Feminists tend to view it as the former only when they attempt to shame rational men, but it more commonly is simple lack of trust.
I am a misogynist and without apology.
-----
With this in mind, misogyny (in the context of lack of trust) is morally justified even in the face of feminist screams of, "You're a misogynist pig who hates women!" which is nothing but an attempt to put you on the defensive and prove otherwise to gain female approval/potential sexual access.
.....
If you are not a misogynist (in the lack of trust sense), you had better be one soon before you are eventually duped like most men.

The definition of 'misogyny' is unclear, misused and distorted by feminists to fit their agenda like many other words too. The most misused word is maybe 'rape' - if you refuse to give money to a woman, she might feel to be 'financially raped', just one example.

I see nothing wrong if a man is doing his best to protect himself against being harmed by malicious females.

Yes, people might talk bad behind your back, but that's all BS. Nobody can force you to socialize with bad local women, to marry them, to make them pregnant.

OK, you said NO to unreasonable demands coming to you from a female. You don't want her, so you are now an asshole, a misogynist, but your money you earned through hard work remains in your wallet. Not bad to be a misogynist... It's a kind of self-protection, self defence...

droid wrote:
So is "misogyny" "justified"? Well, you hinted at this in one of the race threads, still need to make an effort and give each individual a chance...
there are some gems to be found within the cow dung.

The issue with that thinking is there are gems that turn out to be fake after marriage or many years of cohabitation.

I personally believe that no woman should ever be fully trusted by a man. Some women are worse than others for sure, but their natural mandate is to dupe or deprive you in the best way they can.

I would argue that the women you consider "gems" are simply smarter and more adept at the dupe/deprivation game than other women thereby lowering the man's defenses and later depriving him when she can make the most of cashing out of her investment in the man.

After all, a gem is but a worthless piece of stone that other people desperately want thereby driving up its market value.

Both sexes have ravening wolves who wear sheep's clothing. The difference is that women can use their sexuality against men, and most men don't know what a good woman is because modern culture has intentionally confused them.

Unfortunately women do grow older in appearance over time. Some men don't want women simply for this reason. That may be the true issue.

I've had many women do some evil things to me, and they used sex against me. The thing is though, is that that's simply the evil woman's weapon. So the key is to figure out which women are evil.

Listen I've had men try to destroy me as well. One guy I worked with was trying to get me fired while he was acting like he was my best friend, a customer tried to rally my coworkers to turn against me, and my best friend tried his best to convince me that I was unattractive. This is all stuff that men have done to me.

Both men and women can be evil. They key is to figure out who the evil doers are. You'll know them by their froward mouths.

There should be limits on how much we trust women.... or men for that matter.

When looking for a woman for marriage, it is best to find a woman who has traditional values, who believes strongly in marriage, and doesn't believe in divorce. She believes in a submissive, follower, role of the wife in marriage. She also is not argumentative and is easy to get along with, and has strong morals. That kind of woman might expect a man to work to support her. That's fine if she's willing to work hard in the wife role, taking care of her husband's household, being a good mother to the children.

This philosophy of being for men only and being against women is hyper-individualistic. We aren't just individuals. We are a part of a species. Each of us is a part of a nation, a people group in some cases, a society. Men and women reproducing keeps our species going.

Choosing not to marry and to be celibate is fine, and there are legitimate reasons for that. Ridiculing men for choosing to marry and raise the next generation of the species is bad, weird behavior.

MrMan wrote:Ridiculing men for choosing to marry and raise the next generation of the species is bad, weird behavior.

Why, because it offends you and your religious sensibilities?

I beg to differ. Many men appreciate being educated on the grave perils of marriage in the west. Those foolish men who deny those perils and trumpet the cause of Western marriage, should indeed be challenged, rebutted, and even ridiculed as fools who bristle at evidence staring them in the face.

Men like yourself are the useful idiots of feminism, gynocentrism, and the government apparati that support it all.

Contrarian Expatriate wrote:
Many men appreciate being educated on the grave perils of marriage in the west. Those foolish men who deny those perils and trumpet the cause of Western marriage, should indeed be challenged...

You can only educate people who are willing to listen.
There are many men now who are mistrusting - often out of bad experiences in their past - and they listen to such voices like MGTOW and reconsider their 'traditional values' about women, children, family, religion and otherwise 'politically correct' issues.

There are of course some men, who were always lucky in their life - I do not blame them for that. The problem is about that in their narrow mindset they think other men MUST be lucky too. They cannot imagine that a considerably high number of women in Western countries are totally rotten to the core. They cannot jump over their own shadow, if anything goes wrong it MUST be the fault of the man.

In their shallow mindset it is always the female who is 'suffering' and men have to show compassion towards her - while compassion towards men who were badly treated by females is totally out of question, this word does not exist for men and boys.

MrMan wrote:
When looking for a woman for marriage, it is best to find a woman who has ... etc. etc.

Well, first of all you have to find such a woman, I never found one while still living in Europe.
Maybe you can give me an idea, where such women could be if they exist.

All women I met in school and later on during my jobs in Europe had multiple boyfriends, often starting while only 13 years old, had several children from different fathers, several marriages and divorces, had a lot of debts because of their never ending 'studies', preferred bad boys to any ordinary working man with average salary, were highly materialistic especially into expensive cars, designer goods and jewelry, were heavily into a life in alcohol and drugs - the typical 'party-girl', were when talking to them the first time within 2 minutes asking me if they can 'borrow' money from me (of course without any intention ever to pay back, it's from a man anyway) and the list continues....

Men and women reproducing keeps our species going.

Choosing not to marry and to be celibate is fine, and there are legitimate reasons for that. Ridiculing men for choosing to marry and raise the next generation of the species is bad, weird behavior.

Openly said, my species as it is now, I don't care about.

However I agree, 'to ridicule men for choosing to marry' is not a good way to convince a man - but such men will not listen anyway.

While I was still living in Europe it was however more the opposite, such stupid ignorant men ridiculed me, because I refused to socialize with rotten women in my own native country. You should better inform yourself, what feminist-friendly people are talking about men who disagree with them.